Subject: [payload] VP9 P bit (was Re: [avtext] Frame marking & VP9 SVC)

From: Jonathan Lennox <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 5 Jul 2017 22:17:38 +0000

Adding payload@ietf, since details of the VP9 spec itself (as opposed to how it’s used with frame marking) should be discussed there.  Please restrict followups as appropriate.

> On Jul 5, 2017, at 5:41 PM, Sergio Garcia Murillo <[email-masked]> wrote:
> 
> Regarding the P bit, in prev draft the information was per layer-frame, now with the renaming, it is per picture. Not sure if it is a typo, or it has changed it's meaning, but if so, that would be exactly the inverse of the I bit.

This was a typo, yes. Thanks for catching it!  I’ll fix it in the next version. (Notice that there’s a lot of other text around that definition that doesn’t make any sense if P is per-picture.)

On the reasons for the terminology change: “super frame” already means something (different) in VP9, so reusing the term was problematic.  Additionally, what we now call “frame” is exactly what the VP9 codec standard means by “frame”, i.e. a single encoded image.